Posted on 01/27/2015 8:27:31 AM PST by Perseverando
Dear Friends:
On Tuesday Jan. 27thSpeaker Howell’s Rules Committee will hear HJ 497 and HJ 499, applications asking Congress to call a Convention to amend (change) our U.S. Constitution. Please contact the following delegates to OPPOSE these measures. The Hearing will be in House Room 1, around 1:00 pm if you can attend.
delwhowell@house.virginia.gov,
delslandes@house.virginia.gov,
delslandes@house.virginia.gov,
delkcox@house.virginia.gov,
deltkilgore@house.virginia.gov,
dellware@house.virginia.gov,
delcjones@house.virginia.gov,
delborrock@house.virginia.gov,
delbknight@house.virginia.gov,
delringram@house.virginia.gov,
deljmassie@house.virginia.gov,
delghabeeb@house.virginia.gov,
deljjoannou@house.virginia.gov,
delkplum@house.virginia.gov,
deldtoscano@house.virginia.gov,
After all of the sacrifices made by our Founders to birth our nation and form our government, I am troubled that the Constitution is blamed for the ills facing America, when really they are caused by those who ignore their Oath of Office and “we the people” who let them get away with it! Dictators love to hear: “elections will never solve our problems.”
Once called by Congress, the Convention cannot be stopped or limited and will have complete authority to change any part of our Constitution! The only other convention, held in 1787, re-wrote the Articles of Confederation, and changed the ratification requirements from unanimous to three fourths! Yes, it gave us our present Constitution, but we had many statesmen of moral conviction who fought the War of Independence leading the nation at that time. Madison said he trembled at the thought of a second convention after witnessing the first!
The entire Constitution will be open for amendment (change) at the Convention. The Library of Congress (April 14, 2014) Congressional Research Service points out that in the 1970’s-80’s when Balanced Budget applications nearly reached the 34 state threshold, 41 bills were introduced in Congress which “generally included quite specific standards for state petitions, delegate apportionment formulas and delegate qualification…” (p. 36 CRS document R42589) so Congress will be involved.
Randy Barnett, who supports the Convention, in an April 23, 2009 Wall Street Journal article noted: "An amendments convention is feared because its scope cannot be limited in advance. The convention convened by Congress to propose amendments to the Articles of Confederation produced instead the entirely different Constitution under which we now live. Yet it is precisely the fear of a runaway convention that states can exploit to bring Congress to heel." That's like playing a game of "chicken" with our Constitution!
The state legislators planning the Article V Convention rejected a motion that would have prevented Members of Congress, the US Senate, federal judges and governors from serving as convention delegates. They also tabled a motion to restrict the subject matter of the convention.
How would constitutional conservatives have the upper hand at a national bipartisan convention, if conservatives don’t have the upper hand right now in politics, government, schools, churches, health care, or the media? And the liberal Wolf-PAC has also secured passage of three state applications for an Article V Convention with the help of the Young Turks and liberal law professor Lawrence Lessig who wants tax financed elections!
Please also urge your own state delegate and senator to OPPOSE ALL APPLICATIONS ASKING CONGRESS TO CALL AN ARTICLE V CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION.
Thank you for your help!
Sincerely,
Delegate Bob Marshall
<>Why not just ask the States to assert their Constitutional Rights?<>
Repeal the 17th Amendment and they will, once again. Repeal the 17th and we'll never have to worry about anti-10th amendment judges.
The only worthwhile amendments are structural, those that cannot be ignored any easier than even calendar year elections.
Because the founders did not envision that Senators and Presidents would be elected by popular vote... by women and slaves and other NON-STAKEHOLDERS.
Can’t watch it now, maybe later.
Concon alarmism is afoot as usual.
This is a convention to PROPOSE amendments. 75% of the state’s legislatures would have to approve... if a convention can even put a consensus together in the first place.
Using the term “concon” harms your credibility.
Rather than criticize something you obviously haven't researched, take the time to view Levin's video link in
post #14.
Delegate Bob Marshall is either critically misinformed, or has a stake in preserving the existing corrupt system.
If 75% of the state legislatures, or conventions of the people can agree to any amendment, it rightly should become part of our constitution.
While the term “republic” is mouthed at FR, it is often forgotten that it means the people are sovereign.
“... or has a stake in preserving the existing corrupt system.”
Exactly. There is no proposal for a “con con” so anyone raising that specter is misstating the proposed actions. There are many people who stand to lose some power if the states and citizens regain some of their power. Mark Levin initiated this effort and is the defining authority on the subject.
He’s got time to push his ‘concon’ scarecrow act but he doesn’t have 30 minutes to watch Levin tear into disinformation smear jobs like his.
He won’t watch it because he can’t argue against sound logical reasoning.
Ping.
You don’t understand that some people have jobs and can’t sit around watching videos during the day?
Weren’t you the guy railing against people not having enough experience in the real world? What a laugh! Don’t think I will bother watching the video now, if someone with your winning personality is promoting it.
Lunchtime has passed and you’re still on the thread ranting and making excuses.
It’s clear now what you’re about.
Bye Bye!
Yeah, keep up the great sales tactics buddy, you are sure winning them over there.
I listen to Levin's Podcast regularly I just don't agree that making more laws that can be ignored is the answer, it may help, it may not. I am no opposed to it, in fact I am generally in favor of the goals, I just don't think outlaws care what the Constitution says. We need a new Sheriff to take down the Old Crooked Sheriff, who will then become the New Crooked Sheriff, can't you see that?[:-)
There is already a ‘new Sheriff’ in waiting and it is comprised of 7,398 state legislators.
Here’s what they need to propose as an amendment to the Constitution:
To redress the balance of powers between the federal government and the States and to restore effective suffrage of State Legislatures to Congress, the following amendment is proposed:
AMENDMENT XXVIII
Section 1.
A Senator in Congress shall be subject to recall by their respective state legislature or by voter referendum in their respective state.
Section 2.
Upon a majority vote in two-thirds of state legislatures, federal statutes and federal court decisions shall be overridden.
Section 3.
Term limits for Senators in Congress shall be set by vote in their respective state legislatures but in no case shall be set less than twelve years.
________________________________________
Now if Section 1 is replaced with a repeal of the 17th Amendment, then that’s even better but it may be a hard sale. Recalling US Senators gets the job done for state legislatures.
With the above amendment, there would be no Obamacare, no same-sex marriage nonsense and so on.
But But But... “more laws will never make a difference” & “It’s just another amendment for them to ignore”...
This is a STRUCTURAL change to the constitution. It can NOT be ignored... That’s what the “con con” crowd doesn’t understand...
And anything out of the Article V Convention for the proposal of Amendments would have to be ratified by 3/4 of the states...
Read my tagline... Reality is regaining control of Fedzilla...
A couple of points. The convention of states proposes amendments to the constitution. The proposed amendments must be ratified by the states in the same manner an amendment proposed by congress must be ratified by the states. So what is the difference? The convention of states bypasses Congress. That is it. Not scary at all. The next argument is essentially why bother the government won’t follow the amendments anyway. The purpose of the convention of states is to propose amendments to restore the power of the states relative to the federal government. Indeed to provide the states legal ability to reign in the federal government. I believe the repeal of the 17th amendment is a perfect place to start and few would argue against that. So let’s call the convention of states, propose the repeal of the 17th amendment, issue it to the state legislatures for ratification and adjourn the convention. We can then call the next convention after the states iron out any problems found with the first use of Article V.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.